Gun Control, Death of the 2nd Amendment

Name: Professor’s Name: Course: Date: Gun Control, Death of the 2nd Amendment The gun debate continues to divide Americans, and currently, the two factions never seem to have reached common ground. Two distinct groups one which is pro-gun control and the other which is anti-gun control have emerged and do not seem to agree with each other’s stance. To the pro-gun control group, the government needs to have a hand on who buys guns as well as who sells them. Well, the discussion on gun control seems likely to go on forever. No one knows when this discussion will end. However, one thing that people have to agree on is the fact that there has to be a unifying definition or an understanding of the word. One such definition explains gun control as the restrictions that the government adopts with the aim of controlling those who can buy, use, possess, carry, and how one should respond or behave with such a restriction in place (Pena). The above explanation captures the essence and substance of gun control. On the other hand, the anti-gun control group is one that is against any control over those who can buy and sell guns. The lifeline of this group is the Second Amendment which states: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This group feeds on this single-line sentence and continues to grow in strength with each passing day. There is indeed substance in what the anti-gun control group propagates, and it is that the constitution allows them to own, carry, buy, and sell guns. Aside from the constitution, there is also the issue of practicality and whether the U.S. can indeed do away with guns completely. Well, this article seeks to support the anti-gun control group by drawing on the issue of the impracticality of some of the proposals by pro-gun control groups, provision of facts regarding gun-related deaths, and showing some of the loopholes related to background checks. One of the issues that seem to be misconstrued or to be spun around is the number of deaths that are related to guns. The idea often propagated by the pro-gun control faction is that with a reduced number of guns, mass shootings will also reduce. Well, even if this might be the case, this group fails to mention that the highest percentage of gun-related deaths are suicides. Since the 90s, homicide numbers have continually gone down (Safehome.org). However, suicide rates have also gone up, and people seem to be using guns to end their lives more often than in years before. In the U.S., 36,100 people are said to die from guns on a yearly basis. However, what people do not know is that suicides make up the majority or 21,300 deaths compared to 11,000 homicides (Safehome.org). These numbers are indeed indicative of the problem in the United States and also help to denounce the notion that a majority of gun deaths are homicides. The idea being propagated by the pro-gun control faction is that gun violence has risen compared to the past. However, this is a misconception and one that needs to be debunked: does the increased talk on the issue of guns show or mimic the real truth of what is happening in the country especially as it pertains to guns? Well, the answer is no (Krogstad). So, people need to look closely at the breakdown and not at the figures being circulated by the pro-gun control group. Each group comes with its agenda, but it is wrong when a group ignores facts or offers one-sided facts to the public in the hope of swindling or shifting support. One proposal from the pro-gun control group that is baseless and that will not make any relevant changes is the banning of assault weapons. The message being propagated by the pro-gun control group is that banning these weapons will help reduce mass shootings. However, no explanations are being offered as to why or how banning these will help reduce mass shootings. Assault weapons are said to be all semi-automatics and these fire a single bullet at a time (Davidson). Goode from the New York Times goes further and notes that the only difference in these guns is that they have certain features or offer one options to enhance the gun. However, he continues to say that these features or extras do not in any way add to the guns. Davidson echoes him as he notes that these features do not make them faster or make them shoot the same way as automatic weapons. So, those contending that banning assault weapons will help reduce mass shootings are wrong and seem to be basing their argument on wrong facts. Banning these weapons will not help reduce the mass shootings but will only lead to the growth of black or grey market routes whi...